Re: relate a Collection and a PagedCollection

Hi Markus,

> You could also say it is
> 
>  :pc1 rdf:first :a, :b
>          rdf:rest :pc2
>  :pc2 rdf:first :c, :d
>          rdf:rest rdf:nil
> 
> Right?

No, rdf:first is used in a functional way,
so the above would mean that :a == :b and :c == :d.

> So rdf:first = hydra:member

The above indicates that's not possible.

>> So if you say "mingle",
>> this somehow implies that a PagedCollection is both, right?
>> So both a page, and both the collection?
> 
> I think we need to be a bit clearer and consistent with the terminology we
> use otherwise we talk past each other. In the first sentence above, we talk
> about "list nodes" and "item". In the last sentence you talk about "page"
> and "collection".

An issue is that there are two lists:
the list of members and the list of pages.

> For me a "list node" is the thing with the
> rdf:first/rdf:rest properties, a "list item" on the other hand is the value
> of rdf:first.

There is no such thing as a list node.
The thing with rdf:first/rdf:rest is a list (as in: all its members), not a list node.

> In a sense, I cannot point to a single "list node"

No, but you can point to the list item.

My issue with Hydra's list (collection) of pages
is that you cannot point to the list and the page separately.

>> So a PagedCollection is a) the sum of all pages of a collection.
>> 
>> But then follows that
>> <foo?page=2> and <foo?page=5> are the same thing,
>> because both are the sum of all pages the collection <foo>.
>> Right?
> 
> No, both lead to the same logical collection.

So a PagedCollection is not the sum of all pages then,
but just a pointer to it?



Anyway, I'm available to discuss this further if it is productive;
or we could just continue with the other part of this thread.

Cheers,

Ruben

Received on Sunday, 27 April 2014 16:29:33 UTC